|
|
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
evader23 08-Feb-13, 04:14 |
 RematchesI very rarely will issue a rematch win or lose. But I very rarely will decline a direct challenge either(with in a reasonalbe rating range and time limit). It is one thing if you know the person and just want to play with them again but this rematch because you lost I think is a bit childish. Ok maybe childish is a bit harsh as is the tone of this post. But I have noticed a trend of rematches after my oppenent loses and it is almost like we have to play to they win and I was wondering what other people on here think about it. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 08-Feb-13, 15:42 |
Seriously,there is no rule or even an "etiquette" mental rule in corresp chess that states one "must"play both colors or two games.That might be an etiquette rule of one player,but its not to be expected or set in stone for the other player.If I want to play 500 games as white and zero games as black,well,so be it!If I want to steal your points because i'm great at playing the white and not so good at the black,well,so be it,then no black!And only one game for that opponent who I may have just barely squeaked a win out of.Maybe i'm playing a 100 games on another chess site,and don't have the time or willpower to play one more game with that opponent....who knows? I had a player not long ago time-out in a losing position.He was badly losing infact.Then he rechallenged me IN THAT SAME GAME again from that losing position!I declined.If I accepted,I would have won twice!!I sometimes feel bad stealing candy from a baby!!!Ha ha! |
||
|
tactical_abyss 08-Feb-13, 16:10 |
Funny,I had one player put me on his ignore list because I did not play him another game. My answer to that is.... I wish there would have been an option for me to put MYSELF on HIS ignore list to speed up the process of his ignore!Makes me even happier!See,those little things never bother me.All fair in love and war.Actually if I just lost a game to someone,it would be practically nonexistant for me to just want to play another game with that opponent!I call that,infact,a bit unintelligent!Its best sometimes to take a few steps back,look over that opponents past game history again,seeking weakness in a few of his game losses on both color sides and rechallege on another date,or maybe never.In patience,sometimes there is strength and strategic wisdom.100% of all my opponents I check out altleast 10 or more games in his past history of wins/losses/draws to seek out his strengths and weakness's.So,if I lose or even win,i'm not simply going to "rush"into another game.I might want to take a few months to look for another "perfect"game where I feel a bit more comfortable in gaining an edge,atleast theoretically to win AGAIN!Proof?Check my last couple of wins on my record.I've played most or all of those players previously.But there was a big time lag between those wins.I looked for additional weakness's in those players games before I simply rechallenged them again...patience!And whats the result?Another win against that same opponent. Terrible,terrible,I have no etiquette!Hmmmmmm.No etiquette? But 25th place from the top...and rising!So I don't mind ever being labelled by an occassional player as being unfair with no etiquette....yawn! |
||
|
not a rematch, but a resurrection A chess struggle involves two of us. We harness the phantasies of our minds and the hopes of our hearts. Ours is a game for two, and not a puzzle for one. It's a game of counterplay, a struggle whose evolving position is to be imagined, induced, played, mounted, and ridden to where it takes us. It's total war. This harnessing of brains, will, and desire can make a single game a masterpiece, a work of art that we as two fighting artists create together. For a game of chess can be a living work of art as well as a martial art. So if a game ends not from a triumph of strategy, but simply and wastefully because an opponent times out, my policy is to revive that work-in-progress, and always suggest a re-match, resuming our creation from the position just before the flag fell. It's just good chess. And the arrogance of wanting to win only because of superior strategy, not trickery or swindles or clocks. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 09-Feb-13, 10:30 |
Deleted by tactical_abyss on 09-Feb-13, 10:46.
|
||
|
tactical_abyss 09-Feb-13, 10:46 |
TA |
||
|
|
||
|
tactical_abyss 15-Feb-13, 19:40 |
Deleted by tactical_abyss on 15-Feb-13, 20:26.
|
||
|
tactical_abyss 15-Feb-13, 20:26 |
With me,I turn down 99% of all incoming challenges.So this means that I am challenging either a posted game challenge or seek out an individual player from the rating list.But thats one game,not two or more.So it should NOT be expected that I must automatically play two games,even if the opponent posted two games,but most times this is not the case for me. As to the time-out game I mentioned above,I did my opponent a favor by NOT playing from that bad position of his again and I explained why.He apparently did not even look at the board,maybe confused my board with someone elses.I even told him prior to his T.O.that I had him in a mating net!And this was a 2200 rated player!Plus,helping someone commit suicide twice is not my style!Even the abyss can be merciful at times!(Not often,but yes,on rare occassions).That game was around New Years,so perhaps he had one too many of something stronger than soda? |
||
|
I understand it must be different for you, being rated 2504 (as of time of posting) on this site. I don't think it's the "right" of a player to be awarded a rematch, and you are well within your own rights to block players who thinks otherwise. So far a etiquette for me, I just assume those that challenge me to a game are people that enjoy having me as an opponent; quite a flattering thought. In fact, my longest running "rivalry" has been with a fellow I used to work with. We both love chess, so we play a good series of unrated games just to be playing chess against each other. I win the majority of these, but when the game ends, one of us sends out a challenge. You turn down a bunch of incoming challenges, but you must experience more challenges than I. I only hoped to offer a different perspective from a lower ranked player. |
||
|
tactical_abyss 15-Feb-13, 21:12 |
|
||
|
|
||
|
tactical_abyss 15-Feb-13, 21:31 |
|
||
|
|
||
|
tactical_abyss 15-Feb-13, 21:45 |
|
||
|
evader23 18-Feb-13, 08:25 |
Just to clairify TA remined me of a story. Several years ago I had a player time out, and issue a resinstatement challenge(which by the way I have never done). I was slightly ahead I thought why not. He timed out a second time. And for a second time he issued a rematch. I declined and he got angry. HE TIMED OUT TWICE. I politley told him to issue a rematch when he had more time to play. That is that last a heard of it. My point is im with TA if a turn you down it is nothing personal and don't take as such |
||
|
tactical_abyss 18-Feb-13, 10:18 |
Above,let me clarify the difference.There is a big difference between simply a rematch and playing from that position where the result could go either way and a rematch where the opponent is definitely and obviously lost and then wants to play a rematch from an obviously lost but RATED game.It would be MUCH MORE LOGICAL to play from a lost position using an UNRATED Game and simply move the pieces into that position.Only someone who is brain dead would want to intentionally lose 2 or 3 sets of rating points or even chance the possibility! We are in agreement evader,but the logic for anyone that gets mad because you or i turned them down...well "evades"me!It also makes me laugh so hard,I have to smash my head against the wall,in order to stop me from laughing and turning blue! |
||
|
evader23 18-Feb-13, 10:26 |
And Side note TA you and I seem to see things the same on here just just this but other topics on here as well I appreicate have someone one here who shares somewhat of the same thoughts on certian issues |
||
|
tactical_abyss 18-Feb-13, 10:32 |
Well,you can always join my club to get into more detail on subjects and learning. I don't want to psychoanalyze someone in the regular GK forums anyway!(yes,I have an actual license to do that,for real!).Either way,GL to you.Always glad to help. TA |
||
|
shamash 18-Feb-13, 16:17 |
Deleted by shamash on 18-Feb-13, 16:18.
|
||
|
wanting a rematch after a win. <<"I have yet to see someone want a rematch after a win.">> Well, I did. The first time was here, after my opponent in our game on move 20 found such a brilliant refutation of GM Boris Avrukh's theoretical novelty of move 19 in the Catalan line (as published in chapter 8 of Avrukh's book "1 d4" volume 1, page 120) that I corresponded with GM Avrukh after the game, and Avrukh corrected his analysis. Yet in the game itself my opponent lost -- not to my superior playing, but on time -- he was away from Rome just a few hours too long. That just did not feel right to me. So I asked for a rematch (I even asked gameknot to strike the win) , got the rematch, and we replayed our game -- in the interests of good chess. |
||
|
Rematches In the future, before accepting a rematch like that, I would let the person know that if they lose I get a second helping. Most of my games lately are team games. I had one guy challenge me who beat me, then challenged me again. I declined, because I figured he would beat me again. If I thought I might learn some new tricks, I would accept. I'm not keen on learning how to lose--I do that often enough all on my own. |
||
|
I always accept rematches I have had some excellent matches , also ive been very lucky that better players than me keep challenging me , they obviously see something in my game , oh yes the easy rating points!! Nobody has ever turned me down , so i never decline even if the match is outside my usual game setup , i.e i don't play many matches if my opponent moves every 2 days or so !, i Will always suggest a compromise , I have always found a higher rated player than me challenges probably because they can't believe they have lost , !! or they like the way i play |
||
|
woutstra 26-Feb-13, 19:56 |
|
